Skip to main content

Full text of "History And Human Relation"

See other formats


neglect the internal study of the art of Leonardo da
Vinci, the work of Dante, the spiritual achievement of
St. Francis, the intellectual system of Aristotle or 'the
whole Renaissance art of living. These things represent
triumphs of the human spirit, and if we pass over them
we are neglecting the very things most fitted to be
studied as ends in themselves. Historians may be
tempted to behave sometimes as though only those
things are worthy of attention which gain importance
from the fact that they led to something else.

Froude, in his biography of Thomas Carlyle, gives
further development to the case for the" kind of history
which is " resurrection *\ More sober and less romantic
than this latter historian, he shows evefr the scientific
necessity of reinstating before our eyes, as far as possible,
the past in its entirety. On his view, even those who
make it their object to analyse the past and to have
theories about it, must first find out what actually
happened, and must learn to see it as it happened, rich
with all the complexity of life itself* Somebody must
get the play, Hamlet, written, he said, and you must
have the play in front of your eyes, you must see the
story unfolding itself, before you can begin to have
theories of Hamlet or elucidations of the drama.
Ecclesiastical historians, constitutional historians, etc.,
draw their specialised chains of facts from history, and
may reach conclusions as a result of what in reality are
concealed arguments in a circle. The truth is that
history and nature run riot over our academic com-
partments and sub-divisions. The story of Hamlet, as
found in the source which Shakespeare used, may lead